Reading at Mass

[kaygee]

When trained to read lessons in an Eastern rite church, I was taught:

1. How to chant the lessons – thus avoiding giving my personal interpretation of what was being read.
2. How to pronounce difficult names and places.
3. To always keep my eyes on the book – the reader is merely the “voice” of the book and should never try to make eye-contact with the congregation.

I attend daily Mass in a Roman church and have been surprised by the amount of vocal interpretation of the Scripture – readers almost imposing their own meaning to the text by the tone of voice and facial expression. Even when they can’t pronounce all the names properly. . . I also don’t understand the need for the reader to look up at the people – even trying to make eyecontact – during pauses, rather than looking down at the text. . . How are readers trained in the West?

 

[chuffle]

Trained?

In my church, one asks to be placed on the lector list and then reads when scheduled. Simple as that.

Joe

 

[Mysty101]

Hi,

My Parish trains readers, as does every Parish where I know Readers in this area. There is a booklet, which does stress inflection & eye contact. Years ago we were trained as you describe the Eastern training, but this has changed.

The booklet I have is Copyrighted 1981 by the OSB (not really recent–perhaps recent in this area?)

This might be insight into the philosophy of today-- “As a lector (actually a lay person is a reader) you are asked to find the middle ground between uninvolved reading and amateur theatrics.”

 

[vegpotter]

As a lector, I read through my readings several times until I can comfortably look up at the people in the pews. To me, it’s about getting the message across, and getting everyone to understand God’s word. I like what Mysty said about finding a middle ground between uninvolved reading and amateur theatrics. That’s really always been my approach. Apparently it works well, my priest and fellow parishoners tell me they like when I read. I just hope they’re getting something from it. I’m not the focus, the readings are, but if I can read in such a way as to make the readings more relevant, to get people to get something out of them, I feel I’ve done well.

 

[Ben_G]

vegpotter:

I’m not the focus, the readings are, but if I can read in such a way as to make the readings more relevant, to get people to get something out of them, I feel I’ve done well.

I totally agree!!! I am not currently a lector, but I did read at some school Masses in high school. By training lectors to speak clearly and slowly, pausing frequently and making eye contact with the Congregation, I think parishes are mostly on the right track. Nothing could be less efficacious for me than a lector who “runs” up to the ambo, reads the Scripture quickly in a monotone voice without any inflection at all, and “runs” back to his or her seat. For me, it’s usually obvious which lectors have taken the time to prepare thier readings in advance because they have an air of confidence that lends dignity and grace to Liturgy of the Word. Thus, they convey to the Congregation the fact that they actually believe what they are reading, and (for the most part) do not stumble over unfamiliar names of people and places.

 

[stbruno]

Lectors are not to just read the readings like a computer. I was trained to proclaim the readings as a prayer. Prayer is conversation with God…it is two ways…This is His Word to us, conversation. So it should be proclaimed with expression and feeling. I had a six week training session in the proper Proclamation of the word. Not all of our lectors have the opportunity and it certainly reflects it even when they are articulate in the pronounciations of all the difficult words. Our teens attend liturgical training…It is a one day session however, the impact it makes in their effort is visible.

 

[mercygate]

kaygee:

When trained to read lessons in an Eastern rite church, I was taught:

1. How to chant the lessons – thus avoiding giving my personal interpretation of what was being read.
2. How to pronounce difficult names and places.
3. To always keep my eyes on the book – the reader is merely the “voice” of the book and should never try to make eye-contact with the congregation.

I attend daily Mass in a Roman church and have been surprised by the amount of vocal interpretation of the Scripture – readers almost imposing their own meaning to the text by the tone of voice and facial expression. Even when they can’t pronounce all the names properly. . . I also don’t understand the need for the reader to look up at the people – even trying to make eyecontact – during pauses, rather than looking down at the text. . . How are readers trained in the West?

Our training included the instruction to “make eye contact” – which I ignore with impunity for the exact reasons you state. I am doing BUSINESS when I read. The WORD is what is important. We were taught to read the text as if it meant what it says but not to be theatrical. In the Episcopal Church, I was trained never to allow any expression into the reading. But that can obscure the text just as much as putting “personal” expression into the words. If you meditate on the text, read it aloud to yourself several times, and pray that the Lord will use you to speak HIS Word, then, I find, that that is EXACTLY what happens.

I am a perfect TERRORIST about pronouncing words correctly. In my parish, readers receive a big book every year with all the Sunday readings, an exegesis of the texts, AND clear pronunciation guides to every Biblical name and place. I have sold so many copies of That’s Easy for You to Say (W. Murray Severance,
Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1997), they should give me royalties!

 

[Deacon_Ed]

kaygee:

When trained to read lessons in an Eastern rite church, I was taught:

1. How to chant the lessons – thus avoiding giving my personal interpretation of what was being read.
2. How to pronounce difficult names and places.
3. To always keep my eyes on the book – the reader is merely the “voice” of the book and should never try to make eye-contact with the congregation.

I attend daily Mass in a Roman church and have been surprised by the amount of vocal interpretation of the Scripture – readers almost imposing their own meaning to the text by the tone of voice and facial expression. Even when they can’t pronounce all the names properly. . . I also don’t understand the need for the reader to look up at the people – even trying to make eyecontact – during pauses, rather than looking down at the text. . . How are readers trained in the West?

Even in the Eastern Churches the one chanting the readings does, indeed, influence the meaning by the stresses and intonations that are placed upon the words. Only when one chants the readings in a monotone with no differentiation in word timing does one avoid that.

When I chant the Gospel I want to make sure that the meaning comes through, and that means I do change pitch, change tempo, and use other means to emphasize certain words (for example, lengthening the duration of the note for a particualr word).

In the West readers are taught to make eye contact because they are bringing to life the Word of God made Book for the Body of Christ present in the assembly. They are also told to look at the thought groupings present in the readings as well as the overall flow the reading (including checking to see what went before and comes after) so that they can place the empahsis in the right place.

As for names – there is no excuse for not pronouncing them correctly. Realize, however, that most Western readers in the United States will tend to Anglicize the pronunciations so they may be different from what you are used to hearing in the East.

Deacon Ed